General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: is there some significance to what looks like a fly some people have crawling at the bottom of post? [View all]Scootaloo
(25,699 posts)He should have sourced Stormfront to smear a Jewish democrat. Like a clinton supporter (not banned) did.
Or he could rant and rave about how trans-women are sexual predators. Like a clinton supporter (not banned) does.
He could have advocated violence against Muslims under hte logic that "it's the only way to control them" like a (not banned) Clinton supporter did.
He could rant about how marriage isn't an important right and that gay people have enough rights already and ought ot be thankful for that much - a direct, specifically-named TOS violation - like another (unbanned) Clinton supporter has done.
He could maintain a host of sock puppet accounts used to game the alert system, another specifically-named ToS violation performed by a (not banned) Clinton supporter.
He could openly talk about stalking, harassing, and doxing other DU members in order to hound them away from the community, like a number of (not banned) Clinton supporters have done.
He could have gone on an epic flameout ranting about the inherent pathological evilness of an entire ethnic group, like another (not banned) Clinton supporter did.
Instead he linked to an article about people pledging to use Bernie Sanders as a write-in candidate, and got bounced out instantly for it.
No one's saying it's not his fault. An argument could be made that his linking to such an article was a TOS violation. The problem is the chasm of difference between the treatment of Sanders supporters vs. Clinton supporters on this subject.